(throttled the conversation back a bit, hoping that someone from the
release team might take the time to chime in)
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 02:21:38PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > In the way I had thought of things, "rolling" == "testing". That's to
> > say that nextstable branches off the main line of development, gets it's
> > own staging area for updates, and the testing/unstable duo function just as
> > they did before. So from what I see we would need the nextstable-testing
> > area, plugged into the autobuild system, and an independant instance of
> > the release infrastructure as a starting point.
>
> Is the "nexstable staging area" the same as "<release>-proposed-updates"
> in your view ?
basically, yes, though the doors would be open earlier and a bit wider
for allowing stuff into it, and additional constraints might be put in
place for migrating packages out of it into nextstable.
> Or would there be a britney moving stuff from your staging area to
> nextstable ?
yes, that too. basically, anything built in the nexstable-tseting/-p-u
area would not automatically migrate into nextstable without the same types
of criteria checks that are in place for the unstable/testing route.
> Yeah, it would be great to have some feedback from RT team members. I
*bump* :)
sean